Fróðskaparrit - Faroese Scientific Journalhttp://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit
<p class="p1"><span class="s1">Fróðskaparrit is an annual journal with scientific articles from and about the Faroe Islands and Faroese issues. The articles are from all scientific fields and are mainly written in Faroese (mostly Humanities and Social Sciences) or English (Natural and Life Sciences).</span></p>Fróðskapur - Faroese University Pressen-USFróðskaparrit - Faroese Scientific Journal0367-1704

Samansetingin Gjó-kinn í føroyskum staðarnøvnum / he compound Gjó-kinn in Faroese place-nameshttp://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/97
<p><strong>Úrtak:</strong> Greinin viðger trý føroysk staðarnøvn og vísir á at vit í øllum trimum hava eina samanseting av navnorðunum gjógv kv. og kinn kv. (el. kinn­ur k.). Í tveimum teirra hava herð­ing­ar­við­ur­skiftini gjørt at seinra lið er viknað og týdn­ing­urin í navninum tí kámaður og ikki longur gjøgnumskygdur hjá málbrúkaranum. Harvið er latið upp fyri eini morfologiskari endur­grein­ing (re-analysu), sum vit síggja í navna­form­unum Jókin og (í) Gjøkkjum. Hinvegin hev­ur tað triðja navnið, Gjókinnin, varðveitt sítt gjøgnumskygni.</p><p><strong>Abstract:</strong> The article deals with three Faroese place-names and shows that in all three we have a compound made up of the words gjógv ‘gorge, cleft’ and kinn ‘sloping side of a cleft’. In two of them the stress distribution has caused the second element to become weakened such that the sense of the name has been rendered obscure, and unclear to the language user. This has made possible a morphological reanalysis, as we can observe in the forms Jókin and (í) Gjøkkjum. The third name, Gjókinnin, on the other hand, has preserved its original form.</p>Eivind Weyhe
Copyright (c) 2018 Eivind Weyhe
2018-02-202018-02-2051110.18602/fsj.v0i0.97Harðgreip(a)http://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/98
<p><strong>Úrtak:</strong> Í greinini verður víst á at eitt navnorð harð­greip(a) kv. kemur fyri í trimum føroyskum stað­arnøvnum, men í ymiskum líki. Í einum føri er Halgreip navn á bøstykki, í øðrum føri er Harðgreipa navn á innløgdum traðarstykki, og í tí triðja førinum er fleirtalsformurin Harð­greip­ur (ella Harðgreipir) navn á trimum homr­um úti í haganum. Høvundurin setur navn­ið í samband við norrønt harðgreipr adj. ‘harð­hentur’ (í viðurnevnum og jatna- og gívra­nøvnum) og líknandi navnorð í øðrum norð­urlandamálum. Roynt verður at gjøtla um hvør týdningurin kann hava verið í føroyskum, og hildið verður at navnagávan kann sipa til trup­lar umstøður til velting og ferðslu.</p><p><strong>Abstract:</strong> The article directs attention to the noun harðgreip(a) f., which appears in three Faroese place-names, though in different guises. In the one case we find Halgreip as the name given to a piece of cultivated infield, in the second Harðgreipa is the designation of a strip from the outfield, fenced in for cultivation, while in the third the plural form Harðgreipur (or Harðgreipir) is applied to three rocky slopes in the outfield. The author connects the name with the ON adjective harðgreipr ‘hard-handed, heavy handed’ (found in bynames, and in appellations of giants and giantesses), and with nouns of similar import in other Scandinavian languages. Conjecture is offered about what led to the adoption of such a name in the Faroes, and it is suggested it may have referred to difficulties in cultivating the land or travelling across it.</p>Eivind Weyhe
Copyright (c) 2018 Eivind Weyhe
2018-02-202018-02-20122010.18602/fsj.v0i0.98Styrkjandi forliðir sum grót-, hunda- og steyr- í grótføroyskur, hundasjúkur og steyrblindur / Uptoner prefixes like grót-, hunda- and steyr- in grótføroyskur, hundasjúkur and steyrblindurhttp://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/99
<p><strong>Úrtak:</strong> Fleiri ymiskir styrkjandi forliðir eru í før­oysk­um, eins og í hinum norðurlanda­málunum og í øðrum germanskum málum sum týskum og hol­lendskum. Víst verður her, hvørjir styrkj­andi forliðir eru í føroyskum, og komið verður stutt inn á, hvussu slíkir liðir møguliga skulu grein­ast, t.e. sum konstruktiónsidiom.</p><p><strong>Abstract:</strong> Faroese has a wide range of up-toner prefixes; a situation that is known from other Scandinavian languages as well as Germanic languages like German and Dutch. Up-toner prefixes in Faroese are presented, and the question how they shall possible be analyzed will be addressed, where I suggest that they are constructional idioms.</p><p><strong>Lyklaorð:</strong> styrkjandi forliðir, forfestislíkar, gramm­atikalisering, elativar samansetingar, mynst­urmállæra, konstruktiónsidiom, myndan av samansetingum. </p><p><strong>Keywords:</strong> Up-toner-prefixes, prefixoid, grammaticalization, elative compounds, con­struc­tion grammar, constructional idioms, pro­cessing compounds. </p>Hjalmar Petersen
Copyright (c) 2018 Hjalmar Petersen
2018-02-202018-02-20213410.18602/fsj.v0i0.99Hey nørdar! Investigating Faroese-English Language Contact in Computer-Mediated Communication / Hey nørdar! Føroyskt-enskt málsamband í teldusamskiftihttp://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/100
<p><strong>Abstract:</strong> The purpose of this empirical study is a detailed examination of the use of English nouns in the context of written Faroese in computer-mediated communication. The data is derived from one of the biggest Faroese online forums, Kjak.org. As this approach is unprecedented in the linguistic study of the Faroese language, the methodology will be based on comparable investigations into Faroese and other Scandinavian languages. However, the focus will be original in nature, due to the phenomena observed in the data. Paying attention to various variables that come into play in computer-mediated communication in general, such as the influence of features found in spoken language, as well as complex multilingualism, this paper will scrutinise aspects of both morphological and orthographical integration of English nouns. Most strikingly, unlike in previous studies on English loanwords in Faroese, the language material investigated here displays a wide range of creative ad-hoc strategies for solving a number of linguistic problems, such as the marking of morphological boundaries, ad-hoc gender assignment, &lt;ð&gt; as a means of breaking the hiatus etc. As the virtual absence of normative pressure in computer-mediated communication seems to be pivotal in this context, the role of language ideology will also be discussed in this paper.</p><p><strong>Úrtak:</strong> Ætlanin við hesi empirisku rannsóknini er at gera eina nágreiniliga kanning av nýtsluni av ensk­um navnorðum í føroyskum skriftmáli. Kann­ingin byggir á teldusamskifti, og kemur til­farið frá einum av teimum størstu føroysku on­line støðunum, sum eru til, t.e. Kjak.org. Av tí at ein slík tilgongd til ensk lán ikki fyrr er gjørd, er kanningarhátturin heintaður frá líkn­andi kanningum av føroyskum og øðrum skand­i­naviskum málum, men kortini soleiðis, at fokus í greinini er serstakt, og kemur tað av teim­um fyribrigdum, sum koma fram í til­far­in­um. Við at gáa um teir ymisku variablarnar, sum hava týdning í samskifti við teldum al­ment, til dømis ávirkan frá talumálseyðkennum um­framt ógviliga samansettum fleirmæli, so hev­ur verið granskað væl og virðiliga í hesi grein­ini bæði, hvussu navnorðini eru tillagað til bendingarskipanina, og hvussu tey eru til­lag­að til skriftmyndina. Fram kemur sjónliga, og tað er ikki sætt fyrr í granskingini av ensk­um lánorðum í føroyskum, at fleiri kreativar ad-hoc loysnir eru valdar fyri at loysa ymiskar trup­ulleikar, sum markeringin av marki ímill­um orð, ad-hoc kynstillutanir og at &lt;ð&gt; verður sett inn í ljóðglopp o.s.fr. Av tí at normativt trýst næstan ikki er til staðar í teldusamskifti sum hesum, er leikluturin hjá málrøktini eisini tikin til umrøðu.</p>Laura Zieseler
Copyright (c) 2018 Laura Zieseler
2018-02-202018-02-20356610.18602/fsj.v0i0.100Kampen for succès d’estime og salgssucces William Heinesens publicerede romaner i 1930’erne / The battle for succès d'estime and sales success William Heinesens published novels in the 1930shttp://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/101
<p><strong>Abstract:</strong> The article throws new light on the Danish writing Faroese author William Heinesen’s long struggle for succes in his novelistic writing and for financial independence with regard to his published novels in the 1930’s. The article draws on completely new archival material in the context of Heinesen, which is his correspondance with his publisher in Copenhagen, Ejnar Munksgaard. The focus is given on different aspects of sociology of literature, and except for one article (Marnersdóttir, 2011) this angle has not been tested before on the works of Heinesen. Parameters of literature of sociology to be investigated are the role of the market, the relationship between Heinesen and his publisher, the role of the publisher’s consultant Otto Gelsted, the market profile, adaptions to and discomfort for the market, the role of the readers and the role of the reviewers, sales promotions, sales figures etc. The Copenhagen publisher adds Heinesen cultural capital in various ways demonstrating Copenhagen’s importance for his writing, his network and struggle to get a breakthrough as a novelist. Heinesen found resources for his publishing in Copenhagen not available in the Faroes since most Faroese readers were not emancipated to literacy in the modern sense. Thus Heinesen opens up new avenues and new cultural spaces in Faroese literature. Copenhagen becomes the gateway to the world for Heinesen in line with other world imperial metropoles being widely used by writers, intellectuals and other from former colonies as a springboard to get a breakthrough in imperial contexts and beyond. Heinesen’s gole was to awaken the Nordic/ European reader’s curiosity for the Faroe Islands as a new cultural and literary geography. Although Heinesen writes broadly about the Faroe Islands, he does not want to commodify Faroeseness for easy exotic consumption to continental readers. Moreover, he would blow up what he considered as a far too narrow track being his own previous carreer as a symbolist poet. Through his novelistic writing Heinesen got the Faroe Islands as a niche using the spacious novel form as a medium for the Faroese experience.</p><p><strong>Úrtak:</strong> Greinin varpar nýtt ljós á tann dansktskrivandi før­oyska rithøvundin William Heinesen (1900-91) og tógva stríð hansara fyri einum skald­søgu­­frambroti og fyri at blíva fíggjarliga óheft­ur sum rithøvundi. Greinin er grundað á full­komi­liga nýtt skjalatilfar innan William Heine­sen-granskingina, sum er hansara brævaskifti við sín útgevara í Keypmannahavn, Ejnar Munks­gaard. Litið verður nærri at ymsum bók­menta­sosio­logiskum viðurskiftum. Við undantaki av einari grein hjá Maluni Marnersdóttir hevur hetta sjónarhorn ikki verið roynt áður í við­gerð­­um av ritverki Williams. Tey bók­menta­søgu­ligu viðurskifti, sum verða kannað eru leik­luturin hjá marknaðinum, sambandið mill­um William og hansara útgevara, leikluturin hjá konsulentinum Otto Gelsted, markn­að­ar­pro­filur, tillagingar og ampi mótvegis markn­að­inum, leikluturin hjá lesarum og um­mæl­ar­um, søluátøk, sølutøl osfr. Keypmannahavnski forleggjarin veitti Willi­ami mentanarligan kapital á ymsan hátt, og hetta vísir, hvussu stóran týdning Keyp­manna­havn hevur havt fyri skrivingina hjá Willi­ami, hansara netverk og stremban til tess at fáa eitt frambrot sum skaldsøgurithøvundi. Willi­am fekk útgávumøguleikar í Keyp­manna­havn, sum hann ikki fekk í Føroyum av tí at flestu føroysku lesarar ikki vóru bókliga nóg væl mentir í modernaðan forstand um hetta mund­ið. Hann opnar sostatt nýggjar leiðir og nýggj mentanarlig rúm í føroyskum bók­ment­um. Keypmannahavn gerst portrið til heimin í tráð við aðrar av heimsins gomlu imperialu metro­polum, sum rithøvundar, intellektuell og onn­ur úr fyrrverandi hjálondum íðuliga hava brúkt sum lopfjøl til tess at fáa eitt frambrot í im­perialum høpi og handan hetta høpi. Enda­mál Williams var at vekja áhugan hjá norð­ur­lendska lesaranum fyri Føroyum sum ein 'nýggj' mentanarlig og bókmentalig landafrøði. Hóast William skrivar breitt um Føroyar, so er hann í longdini ikki áhugaður í at umskapa før­oysk eyðkenni soleiðis, at tey gjørdust lætt­keypt eksotiskt forbrúk hjá lesarum á evrop­e­iska meginlandinum. Haraftrat slapp hann sær burtur úr tí tronga sporinum sum symbol­ist­isk­ur yrkjari. Í mun til yrkingaformin gevur rúm­ligi skaldsøguformurin Williami møguleika fyri at brúka Føroyar sum eina serstaka rók av møgu­leikum. Skaldsøgan roynist sum ein miðil fyri føroyskar royndir í einum altjóða høpi.</p>Bergur Rønne Moberg
Copyright (c) 2018 Bergur Rønne Moberg
2018-02-202018-02-206710010.18602/fsj.v0i0.101Freden i Kiel 1814 – England, Sverige, Danmark og de nordatlantiske øer / The Treaty of Kiel 1814 – England, Sweden, Denmark and the North Atlantic Islandshttp://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/102
<p><strong>Úrtak:</strong> Ymisk ástøði hava verið sett fram um orsøk­ir­nar til, at Føroyar, Ísland og Grønland vóru ver­andi undir donskum valdi eftir Friðin í Kiel, tá danska krúnan noyddist at lata Noreg frá sær til svensku krúnuna. Meðan eldri gransking hevur hildið uppá, at danski samráðingar­mað­ur­in hevði ein høvuðsleiklut í hesum, so hevur nýggj­ari gransking lagt størri herðslu á leik­lutin hjá Svøríki og serliga Onglandi. Tað hev­ur m.a. verið hildið uppá, at onglendingar í veru­leikanum ætlaðu at leggja tær norður­atlant­isku oyggjarnar undir ensku krúnuna, men at teir í seinastu løtu broyttu støðu og syrgdu fyri, at tær vóru verandi undir donsku krún­uni. Í hesi grein verður grundgivið fyri, at hóast tað er sannlíkt, at Ongland vildi forða fyri, at tær atlantisku oyggjarnar gjørdust svensk­ar, so eru eingi prógv fyri, at Ongland hevði hendan leiklutin; og at keldurnar bein­leiðis tykjast mótprógva, at onglendingar høvdu nakrar ætlanir um at leggja tær norð­ur­atlantisku oyggjarnar undir ensku krúnuna. Held­ur mundi tað vera vantandi áhugi fyri norð­uratlantisku oyggjunum, sum var orsøkin til, at tær vóru verandi danskar.</p><p><strong>Abstract:</strong> Different theories have been proposed to explain why the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Greenland remained under Danish sovereignty after the Treaty of Kiel, when the Danish Crown had to give up Norway to the Swedish Crown. While older research maintains that the Danish negotiator played a key role in this, more recent research has paid more attention to the role of Sweden and especially England. It has e.g. been claimed that the English really intended to annex the North Atlantic Islands to the English Crown, but that they in the last moment changed their minds and directly caused that the islands remained under the Danish Crown. In this article, it will be argued that even if it is likely that England wanted to prevent that the Atlantic islands became Swedish, there is no evidence to support that England had this role; and that the sources directly appear to disprove that the English had any intentions to annex the North Atlantic Islands to the English Crown. It is more conceivable that a lack of interest for the North Atlantic Islands was the reason for that they remained Danish.</p>Hans Andrias Sølvará
Copyright (c) 2018 Hans Andrias Sølvará
2018-02-202018-02-2010113810.18602/fsj.v0i0.102Tað strandaða skipið í Svínoy í 1804 – og dømir um smáhandil og loynihandil / The stranded ship in Svínoy in 1804 – and examples of small-scale shopping and smugglinghttp://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/103
<p><strong>Úrtak:</strong> Tann 14. februar í 1804 strandaði eitt stórt skip í Svínoy við dýrabarari last av klædnastoffi og tekstil. Nógv av hesum varð bjargað uppá land, áðrenn tað í eini ódn bleiv knúst. Skipið æt Venus frá Sundsvall í Svøríki; skipari var Sam. Dryselius. Men lítið og einki er skrivað um hesa hending, hóast sjáldan ella ongantíð er størri ella dýrari vørunøgd komin inn í landið. Hon bleiv seld á uppboði, og tað sum er skriv­að í ”Auctiónsprotokollina” gevur eina frálíka mynd av hesum, hvørjar vørur vóru í lastini, hvørjir persónar keyptu, hvat teir keyptu og hvat ið prísurin var. Meira enn 5000 lutir vórðu bjargaðir í land, og selt var tilsamans fyri meira enn 12.000 Ríkisdálar. (Til samanberingar: 1 tunna av bygg kostaði vanliga umleið 5 Rdl) Teir sum keyptu størstu nøgdir, mest embæt­is­menn, hava ikki ber keypt til egið brúk. – Grein­in skal í fyrsta lagi lýsa hendingina og hvat ið fór fram á uppboðssølunum. Harnæst verð­ur roynt at greina, hvagar ið alt hetta klædna­stoffið fór. Her verður gjørt vart við, at smá­søla innanlanda ikki var tað sama sum loyni­handil. Eitt, sum kann skjalprógvast, er at Poul P. Nolsøe ólógliga hevur útflutt eina nøgd av Manchester-stoffi til Norra. Men hildið verð­ur, at nógv av stoffinum, var selt í býti við bundn­ar troyggjur og síðan sent av landinum sum sendingsgóðs við skipunum hjá Kongaliga Handlinum.</p><p><strong>Summary:</strong> On February 14th in 1804 a ship ran aground on Svínoy with a precious cargo of cloth and other textile commodities. Large amounts of these commodities were saved before the ship in a following storm was crushed. The ship was named Venus from Sundsvall in Sweden, and the captain was Sam. Dryselius. But, remarkably, very litle is written about this event, despite the fact that it was perhaps the largest and most valuable cargo ever brought ashore. It was, after a thorough registration of every item, put up for auction, and every detail of this is writen in a minute book which gives us a detailed picture of the content of the cargo, the list of persons that were buying, and what were the prices. More than 5000 items were saved and sold for more than 12.000 Rigsdaler (In comparison, the price of 1 barrel of barley was around 5 Rdl). The local officials bought the largest amounts, but it can not have been for their own consumption alone. – The article shall in the first place clear up the event and illuminate the auctions. The next problem is to attempt to follow how and where the commodities were forwarded. It is stressed that small-scale shopping is not the same as illicit traffic. One event can be documented. The skipper Poul P. Nolsøe brought an amount og Manchester-cloth to Norway, and sold it to a merchant there. This is undoubtly an incidence of smuggling. But the assumption is put forward that most of this cloth and textile was sold in exchange for sweaters that were shipped to Denmark as ”sendingsgods” (private commodities shipped by the Royal Trade Mono­poly).</p>Rolf Guttesen
Copyright (c) 2018 Rolf Guttesen
2018-02-202018-02-2013916010.18602/fsj.v0i0.103A Visit to the Faroe Islands in 1942 by Gabriel Turville-Petre / Ein vitjan í Føroyum í 1942 hjá Gabriel Turville-Petrehttp://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/104
<p><strong>Abstract:</strong> In his journal Gabriel Turville-Petre gives an account of his travels through the Faroe Islands in 1942. Despatched by the Foreign Office to investigate the views of the people during the British occupation, he met politicians such as Christmas Møller, Carl Aage Hilbert, Peter Mohr Dam and Kristian Djurhuus, writers such as Jóannes Patursson, Símun av Skarði and Janus Djurhuus, as well as farmers and businessmen, boatmen and schoolteachers. He gives his views, not always complimentary, on their characters and opinions. He describes the language and literature, the scenery and (less enthusiastically) the weather, as well as the food he was given, such as skerpikjøt, and traditions such as the chain dance.</p><p><strong>Úrtak:</strong> Í dagbók síni greiðir Gabriel Turville-Petre frá sín­um ferðum í Føroyum í 1942. Foreign Office hevði sent hann avstað fyri at kanna sjónarmið hjá fólkinum undir bretsku hersetingini; hann hitti politikarar, m.a. Christmas Møller, Carl Aage Hilbert, Petur Mohr Dam og Kristian Djurhuus, høvundar, m.a, Jóannes Patursson, Símun av Skarði og Janus Djurhuus eins og bóndir, handilsmenn, sjófólk og skúla­lær­arar. Hann setur fram síni sjónarmið, ikki altíð rós­andi, um teirra persónsmenskur og mein­ing­ar. Hann lýsir málið og bókmentirnar, landslag­ið og (minni eldhugaður) veðrið eins og matin, sum hann fekk, m.a. skerpikjøt, og siðaarvin, m.a. føroyska dansin.</p>Thorlac Turville-Petre
Copyright (c) 2018 Thorlac Turville-Petre
2018-02-202018-02-2016118210.18602/fsj.v0i0.104PhD Theses by Faroese scientists or on Faroese subjects defended in 2017http://fsj.um.fo/ojs/index.php/frit/article/view/105
10 PhD theses were defended in 2017.E. Editor
Copyright (c) 2018 E. Editor
2018-02-202018-02-2018310.18602/fsj.v0i0.105